The CCiCAP Award (PRE- and Post-AWARD DISCUSSION) Thread

[robertross]

Also, let's not forget that the money Boeing puts into human rating the Atlas V, will benefit SNC as well, since both use the same LV.

No, SNC does not get a free ride out of this. There is integration, analysis, certification, interfaces, etc that are unique to each vehicle

Well, as Old Atlas said, at least the new Centaur configuration test would be beneficial, since both systems will require this same test. I'm sure there are other overlapping tests, certifications, etc. that will be of mutual benefit.

I think the end result will be SNC having to pay a premium for a HR Atlas flight, ammortized over the # flights they intend to fly over a certain period, along with the # flights Boeing intends to fly under this configuration, which is obviously the fair thing to do.

[Go4TLI]

ULA is a sub in both instances. Boeing and SNC each have to take that into account but it does not mean Boeing is burdened with the costs for SNC

[oldAtlas_Eguy]

ULA is a sub in both instances. Boeing and SNC each have to take that into account but it does not mean Boeing is burdened with the costs for SNC

The difference is that Boeing gets money for the ULA completed milestones from NASA so its not Boeing that is paying but NASA. So the common ULA items is fully paid for under Boeing. If SNC was fully funded I expect that SNC would have had these Atlas V milestones and Boeing would not.

[PeterAlt]

ULA is a sub in both instances. Boeing and SNC each have to take that into account but it does not mean Boeing is burdened with the costs for SNC

Let's not forget to mention also that - say both end up getting awarded crew services contracts - more Atlas V vehicles would be produced. This could potentially lower the price per launch. If ULA chooses to pass the savings to its customers, both Boeing and SNC benefit with lower cost flights.

[Lars_J]

Quite simply, no, to all of that.

 

You, and no one really does, have any insight to the optional milestiones each has negotiated with NASA as they are all proprietary.

Of course. But the public milestones are significant information. You can pretend if you want that SNC has optional milestones that will put them at parity with SpaceX or Boeing (assuming all complete their milestones on schedule) - but then *you* are the one making assumptions about information "no one really" has.

I never implied any of that. Go back and look at your post. You are suggesting Boeing and SpaceX have it in the bag. The reasons you state are not valid and a lot can happen leading to multiple conclusions

The only way you can read my post as "Boeing and SpaceX have it in the bag" is if you failed to notice the multiple *IF* qualifiers in my statements. It is not a slam dunk, spaceflight is hard, and odds are good that delays and/or problems will occur to SpaceX, Boeing, *and* SNC.

Let me state again for clarity: *IF* (yes *IF*) everything goes well for SpaceX and Boeing, *THEN* SNC will be in a tough position in a down-select.

[Go4TLI]

ULA is a sub in both instances. Boeing and SNC each have to take that into account but it does not mean Boeing is burdened with the costs for SNC

The difference is that Boeing gets money for the ULA completed milestones from NASA so its not Boeing that is paying but NASA. So the common ULA items is fully paid for under Boeing. If SNC was fully funded I expect that SNC would have had these Atlas V milestones and Boeing would not.

That's not the way it works

[yg1968]

So, the purpose of giving SNC half an award is to have a back up in case the other two fail... Correct?

I am not sure that's the right way of seing it. SNC has as much chances of winning a commercial crew services contract in 2014 (or later) as Boeing and SpaceX at this point. They will receive half of the funding but they should not be seen either as a backup or a junior partner.

Not really. Their only realistic chance for SNC after the current CCiCAP is if Boeing and/or SpaceX pull out or are significantly delayed. Because if both of them complete their milestones, they will be quite a bit ahead of Dreamchaser - and the pick for final commercial crew contract will be between Boeing and SpaceX. Or both, if NASA can keep two providers - but I see no scenario where three providers get contracts.

So in practice SNC's Dreamchaser is a risk-reduction backup, unless some significant advantage DC has over the capsules comes to light. That's the way it looks to me, at least. I suppose it also depends on how strong the "Shuttle-hugger" force is at NASA too.

The CCiCap optional milestones would bring DC all the way to a a crewed test flight. All proposals had to have to get to that point in their optional milestones.  Gerst also said the same thing during the press conference. For DC, CDR would also be achieved through their optional milestones.

[FinalFrontier]

ULA is a sub in both instances. Boeing and SNC each have to take that into account but it does not mean Boeing is burdened with the costs for SNC

The difference is that Boeing gets money for the ULA completed milestones from NASA so its not Boeing that is paying but NASA. So the common ULA items is fully paid for under Boeing. If SNC was fully funded I expect that SNC would have had these Atlas V milestones and Boeing would not.

That's not the way it works

Actually that is the way it works.

[Go4TLI]

Nope, but if you insist I'm not going to lose any sleep over it

[yg1968]

ULA is a sub in both instances. Boeing and SNC each have to take that into account but it does not mean Boeing is burdened with the costs for SNC

The difference is that Boeing gets money for the ULA completed milestones from NASA so its not Boeing that is paying but NASA. So the common ULA items is fully paid for under Boeing. If SNC was fully funded I expect that SNC would have had these Atlas V milestones and Boeing would not.

That's not the way it works

Most of DC's milestones relating to human rating the Atlas V are likely in the optional milestones period because there are few in the baseline period. But given that the optional milestones are optional, some will not be exercised by NASA (especially if they are duplicates). For example, the dual centaur is already being tested by Boeing in its base period milestones. NASA would obviously not exercise a DC optional milestone that would test this again (assuming that there is one in DC's optional milestones).

[yg1968]

Thanks Robert and FF. And yes, Mr Sirangelo noted commercial customers outside of NASA on a very open telecon this evening. Got a lot to write up.

Did anybody record this SNC telecon?

[Silmfeanor]

Thanks Robert and FF. And yes, Mr Sirangelo noted commercial customers outside of NASA on a very open telecon this evening. Got a lot to write up.

Did anybody record this SNC telecon?

L2, along with perhaps THE best CGI movie with lots of juicy info on dream chaser 

[watermod]

Most destination discussion for these 3 has been ISS, some commercial destination (Bigelow etc..) and other later possible NASA destinations.

I can't help feeling that after "progress" the Air Force will be very interested in these craft.   When one considers their little X-demo craft flitting about SNC's craft might interest them more. 

If the Air Force is interested one could well imagine more funds available for development than the NASA awards imply.  Some of these funds might well be black and therefore lead to surprise development achievements not expected when one looks at the published funding.

[PeterAlt]

Any idea how NASA will number the flights? Will it be a generic label for all commercial providers (ie CTS-1, CTS-2, etc.) or special labels per provider (ie SPX-1, BOE-1, SNC-1)?

[Rocket Science]

Someone mentioned DC's long term exposure of thermal protection system as being a constraint on a life boat role. No orbiter was lost to TPS damage from 2 weeks max? exposure sustained in space. Are there ""cheap"" ways to shield the DC TPS so that it can qualify without caveat for this role?

The X-37 stayed up for 15 months and the TPS performed fine as far as we know...

Since X-37 is a free-flyer, it can fly in attitudes that minimize exposure to MMOD. DC won't have control over its attitude once docked to ISS.

Interesting point Jorge… Do we have any data on the periods spent on respective orbits for both X-37 test flights so far?

[Downix]

Also, let's not forget that the money Boeing puts into human rating the Atlas V, will benefit SNC as well, since both use the same LV.

The item that most interested me for Atlas V was the dual engine Centaur test. I looked up the flight history and Atlas V has never flown a dual engined Centaur. It seems to be something that LM/ULA skipped on spending because of low likelyhood of being used in the original Atlas V development.

The DEC last flew on Atlas III, and while the same physical structure remains, the new electronic actuators have not yet been migrated over to the DEC from the updated Atlas V Centaur.

[Jim]

Any idea how NASA will number the flights? Will it be a generic label for all commercial providers (ie CTS-1, CTS-2, etc.) or special labels per provider (ie SPX-1, BOE-1, SNC-1)?

Not even on the radar.

[tigerade]

Any idea how NASA will number the flights? Will it be a generic label for all commercial providers (ie CTS-1, CTS-2, etc.) or special labels per provider (ie SPX-1, BOE-1, SNC-1)?

Not even on the radar.

Which is fine with me.  A lot of exciting stuff in the coming years, not just CCiCap development, but the CRS flights from SpX and Orb.  I am also really looking forward to the Pad Abort Test and the In-flight abort tests from SpaceX.  That is going to be quite a show!

[marsavian]

More than happy with the awards. They picked the three with the best chance of getting to the ISS soon.

I do really hope ATK continues their efforts, as we can never have enough options to service the ISS.

I bet all the New Space fans amongst the Presidential Advisers are happy too, funnily enough they got exactly the result they wanted too . I wonder though if this is really the end of it, will ATK's fans in Congress now try to engineer a 180 and try to enlarge CCiCAP to also include ATK, all in the interest of maximizing full commercial competition of course . Will the SLS fans there go along with it if they do if it means it comes out of their budget ?  This may not exactly be over yet by any means ...

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-08-03/boeing-spacex-win-900-million-in-awards-for-spacecraft-1-.html

George Torres, a spokesman for Alliant Techsystems, said in an e-mail that the company was “disappointed” it wasn’t selected. It teamed up with Lockheed Martin Corp. (LMT) and a unit of European Aeronautic Defence and Space Co. to develop a rocket called Liberty to compete for U.S. business.

Torres said “it’s too early” to say whether the company will seek to challenge the decision.


p.s. ATK's test flight date matched SpaceX and all their hardware already exists in one form or another so they may have good grounds for complaining here.

[Jason1701]

Any idea how NASA will number the flights? Will it be a generic label for all commercial providers (ie CTS-1, CTS-2, etc.) or special labels per provider (ie SPX-1, BOE-1, SNC-1)?

Not even on the radar.

Which is fine with me.  A lot of exciting stuff in the coming years, not just CCiCap development, but the CRS flights from SpX and Orb.  I am also really looking forward to the Pad Abort Test and the In-flight abort tests from SpaceX.  That is going to be quite a show!

FWIW, Blue Origin is supposed to do a pad abort test in the coming weeks for CCDev-2 (or may have already done so).